Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Computer Geeks As Loners? Data Says Otherwise

Soulskill posted about 6 months ago | from the guess-what-day-it-is dept.

Stats 158

Computerworld reports on an analysis of census data to compare marriage rates for different professions. They found the rate for tech workers to be similar to that of other white-collar professions, and significantly higher than the rate for the general population. 62.1% of people with IT jobs are married, as are 56.5% of scientists and 65.5% of engineers. This compares well to people in legal professions (62.0%), medical jobs (61.3%), and finance (62.4%). 51% of the adult U.S. population was married as of the 2010 census. Tech workers do have a slightly higher percentage of people who have never married — 26.7% of IT workers and 31.9% of scientists — but they also have slightly fewer divorces.

cancel ×

158 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Engineers FTW! (2)

some old guy (674482) | about 6 months ago | (#46248427)

65.5%! We win!

Re:Engineers FTW! (5, Funny)

drunkennewfiemidget (712572) | about 6 months ago | (#46248439)

I guess... if marriage is 'winning'.

Re:Engineers FTW! (0, Offtopic)

g4sy (694060) | about 6 months ago | (#46248499)

It is. Fuck beta.

[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (2)

pla (258480) | about 6 months ago | (#46248795)

Sure... In the same way that "paying taxes" counts as a "perk" of civilization. You realize that getting married means you get to pay MORE in taxes, right?

/ Not married.
// Plan to stay that way.
/// With the same woman for 20 years, and no plans to upgrade.
//// Fix the damned CSS on Slashdot "Classic", Dice!

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 6 months ago | (#46248849)

You realize that getting married means you get to pay MORE in taxes, right?

Nope. Dropped my taxes.

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (1)

pla (258480) | about 6 months ago | (#46248999)

Offhand, I can think of only one situation that makes that possible - One of you makes a good amount of money, and one doesn't work.

Because if you both make around the same amount, stock up on lube. And by "around the same amount", well, during a bout of unemployment a few years ago, with my SO making six figures and me "making" $350 a week as a waste of flesh, we STILL would have lost money if we had filed as married.

Though in fairness, we own a house together, which makes a big difference - She can claim all the expenses and I can take the standard deduction - Which you can't legally do if married filing separately.

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (2)

AK Marc (707885) | about 6 months ago | (#46249343)

And by "around the same amount", well, during a bout of unemployment a few years ago, with my SO making six figures and me "making" $350 a week as a waste of flesh, we STILL would have lost money if we had filed as married.

That sounds implausible. Aside from the different standard deductions, She'd have been in the 28% bracket singly, or 25% bracket married. It wasn't until my wife made more than 50% of what I did where it kicked in being cheaper to be single than married. But then, much of "our" things were in only one name, so we didn't have much wiggle room in assigning deductions and such.

The first year I was married, I paid less than 10% federal income tax, and less than 20% total tax (including all state and local taxes). Combined gross income was above $100k. $100k gross is the top 10% of wage earners. So the top 10% of wage earners are paying less than 10% income tax (based on my experience). I was paying more than that before marriage, and it's creped up after, as her income has risen.

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (1)

enharmonix (988983) | about 6 months ago | (#46249041)

You realize that getting married means you get to pay MORE in taxes, right?

Nope. Dropped my taxes.

I have three kids. I haven't paid taxes in 9 years. The year we bought our house we actually got a refund of $12,000 from all the tax credits we qualified for.

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about 6 months ago | (#46249119)

Your income tax drops. However you tend to buy more stuff, so you are paying more in sales tax.

The biggest problem with money when you get married, is that your partner will have different things that they like to splurge on and things that they are willing to do without.

You may want to go see the new movie, while she thinks spending money on movies are too much money. While you can go without that new Apple Product while for her it is a must have. Normally what happens is you see the Movie and Get the Apple Product and you both end up with less in the savings bank.

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249173)

If you live somewhere where there is sales tax. I don't pay sales tax.

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249855)

"If you live somewhere where there is sales tax."

Or if you live somewhere where Amazon isn't, then you don't have to pay sales tax to Amazon.

Re:[Fuck Beta] Re: Engineers FTW! (1)

gIobaljustin (3526197) | about 6 months ago | (#46249259)

The biggest problem with money when you get married, is that your partner will have different things that they like to splurge on and things that they are willing to do without.

How is that specific to getting married?

A curious game (1)

Ambitwistor (1041236) | about 6 months ago | (#46250055)

The only way to win is not to play.

Re:Engineers FTW! (4, Funny)

gnick (1211984) | about 6 months ago | (#46248527)

I'm an engineer - And I'm married for the second time! Do I count double?

Re:Engineers FTW! (5, Funny)

davester666 (731373) | about 6 months ago | (#46248799)

No. 2 demerits for not learning from your first mistake.

Re:Engineers FTW! (5, Funny)

gstoddart (321705) | about 6 months ago | (#46248843)

No. 2 demerits for not learning from your first mistake.

Bah, like all engineers, he was going for empirical evidence instead of a theoretical model. ;-)

Re:Engineers FTW! (3, Funny)

inasity_rules (1110095) | about 6 months ago | (#46249367)

Well, having worked with a lot of theorists, the theoretical model is, while nice and mathematically correct, generally shit in the real world. Have a look at how many people do step tests on PID loops. Oh... I think I just realised why I am single... Shit...

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

gnick (1211984) | about 6 months ago | (#46249959)

No. 2 demerits for not learning from your first mistake.

Learn from that? Sure, finding the mean with one test case is easy. But do you have any idea how wide the error bars are???

Re:Engineers FTW! (2)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 6 months ago | (#46248953)

I'm an engineer - And I'm married for the second time!

That makes you an exception. Divorce rates vary widely [lexfridman.com] by profession. In America, 50% of marriages end in divorce. For engineers it is only about 10%. Education makes a big difference: college graduates have far lower divorce rates than high school drop outs. It also varies widely with race: 45% of white-white marriages end in divorce. 70% of black-black marriages do. The odds may be against you, because 75% of all second marriages end in divorce, although only 50% of third marriages do.

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 6 months ago | (#46249293)

It also varies widely with race: 45% of white-white marriages end in divorce. 70% of black-black marriages do.

This makes me curious to know what the percentage is for interracial marriages.

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

gnick (1211984) | about 6 months ago | (#46249939)

I'm in one. White-white lasted ~12 years. White-Asian is ongoing.

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

hendrips (2722525) | about 6 months ago | (#46250065)

It's also worth noting that that's 50% of marriages ending in divorce. Only around one third of the (married) U.S. population will have a divorce, but some of them will have 2, 3, or more divorces, which drives up the average. For an extreme illustration, a population consisting of Elizabeth Taylor and my wife would have had 88.9% of their marriages end in divorce, but only 50% of that population would have ever had a divorce.

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 6 months ago | (#46250215)

I think you may need more people in your model—you have Elizabeth Taylor marrying herself at least eight times.

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | about 6 months ago | (#46250213)

I wonder how that third marriage statistic changes if you eliminate those that started when at least one of the participants were elderly.

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

goombah99 (560566) | about 6 months ago | (#46250259)

I'm an engineer - And I'm married for the second time! Do I count double?

Are you just saying you switched hands?

Re:Engineers FTW! (1)

erice (13380) | about 6 months ago | (#46249121)

US Engineers are older though so it makes sense that more would be married. It is a commonly quoted statistic with the IEEE but perhaps not well known elsewhere that their membership is getting older 1 year per year. The same is not true in China and India.

We will end up as loners and pariahs... (-1, Troll)

grub (11606) | about 6 months ago | (#46248441)


... as beta continues to spread its AIDS among the geek population.

Re:We will end up as loners and pariahs... (0)

ElementOfDestruction (2024308) | about 6 months ago | (#46248767)

How the fuck is this modded up? Fuck you Beta trolls

In other words. (3, Funny)

jellomizer (103300) | about 6 months ago | (#46248443)

We are normal human beings like the rest of the world.

Re:In other words. (2)

jones_supa (887896) | about 6 months ago | (#46248677)

No! We are special snowflakes!

Re:IT Sector (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248705)

We also have lowest unemployment in IT

Re:In other words. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248735)

Not quite. It says we get divorced less. It seems we understand the sub-optimizing nature of divorce as respect to cash flow and lifestyle. I'd imagine we lease thing less often and rent dwellings less often too.

Re:In other words. (2)

jellomizer (103300) | about 6 months ago | (#46248959)

Or the fact that we are working in an area that is in Demmand right now and we are not getting laid off so rapidly. So we are not stressing our families with unpredictable income.

Re:In other words. (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 6 months ago | (#46249357)

sub-optimizing

"pessimizing"

Re:In other words. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249229)

Maybe you are.

I, apparently, am just a loser that writes code.

Computer Geeks? (5, Informative)

nine-times (778537) | about 6 months ago | (#46248469)

the rate for tech workers to be similar to that of other white-collar professions

So that's "tech workers", not computer geeks. Even if you accept the idea that "computer geek" is a meaningful classification, it's no longer the case that only computer geeks work with computers. Tech workers have profiles similar to other white-collar professionals because "tech work' are just white collar professions.

Re:Computer Geeks? (2)

enharmonix (988983) | about 6 months ago | (#46248635)

I don't think just working with tech makes you a "tech worker." Working on tech does. But you're right about it not being computer geeks. The people I work with aren't really nerdy, like you say, and most of them are women. Can't forget that it's not just guys in IT anymore.

Not really geeks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248471)

Just losers who buy into the notion that you have to have a title or be in a relationship to be happy. Sheep. What else is new? Moving on.

Re:Not really geeks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248493)

said the lonely single code monkey

Re:Not really geeks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248695)

Said the miserable fake geek in a crappy relationship. There, that was easy.

Re:Not really geeks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248711)

Just losers who buy into the notion that you have to have a title or be in a relationship to be happy. Sheep. What else is new? Moving on.

Let me guess that you would like to have a relationship too, but have failed to get one.

Great, now I feel even lonelier (4, Insightful)

ebunga (95613) | about 6 months ago | (#46248473)

Just what I needed to read on singles shaming day.

Re:Great, now I feel even lonelier (5, Insightful)

inasity_rules (1110095) | about 6 months ago | (#46248523)

I refer to it as Singles Awareness Day. Or, S.A.D.

Re:Great, now I feel even lonelier (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248881)

Just remember, tomorrow all the chocolate is half price. You may have to settle for pink and red wrappers, but the self-checkout line means you don't even have to recognize the existence of a cashier when you cart out 50kg of candy-coated milk chocolate.

Re:Great, now I feel even lonelier (1)

jivex5k (3458385) | about 6 months ago | (#46248887)

Well...guess I can't use it as an excuse any longer...

Re:Great, now I feel even lonelier (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249011)

For us married peopled, its going through the motions day.

Re:Great, now I feel even lonelier (5, Funny)

gstoddart (321705) | about 6 months ago | (#46249039)

So, do whatever everybody else does ... rent porn, order pizza and drink scotch.

Or, is that just me?

I hope my wife is OK with that, because it's probably too late to go looking for flowers. ;-)

Re:Great, now I feel even lonelier (1)

arielCo (995647) | about 6 months ago | (#46249805)

So, do whatever everybody else does ... rent porn, order pizza and drink scotch.

Or, is that just me?

Rent? For the last 10 years or so, maybe it's been just you.

Re:Great, now I feel even lonelier (1)

Valdrax (32670) | about 6 months ago | (#46250023)

So, do whatever everybody else does ... rent porn, order pizza and drink scotch.

Yes, but what do you do for special days?

So I'm not alone... (1)

Kenja (541830) | about 6 months ago | (#46248517)

I'm just a rarity!

I don't drink alone... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248547)

Just me and Jim Beam.

Does the data imply better marriages? (2)

enharmonix (988983) | about 6 months ago | (#46248551)

It's encouraging that a higher than average number of IT workers are married but a higher percentage also have never married because I interpret that to mean IT folks don't just commit, but they stay married too. (I am by profession in IT and I know I am completely committed to my wife and that it's reciprocal, but of course I'm just one person.) There's the term "geek chic" which I guess means nerds are more attractive than they used to be, and I guess that in the end "nice guy syndrome" works to our advantage.

Re:Does the data imply better marriages? (2)

inasity_rules (1110095) | about 6 months ago | (#46248609)

I guess that in the end "nice guy syndrome" works to our advantage.

Wait... What?! I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Does the data imply better marriages? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 6 months ago | (#46248923)

and I guess that in the end "nice guy syndrome" works to our advantage.

LOL .. do you read Slashdot at all?

Because I would say most of us are suffering from "asshole syndrome" instead of "nice guy syndrome".

Curmudgeon seems more common than courteous -- and, yes, I am told I mostly fall into the former category.

Re:Does the data imply better marriages? (1)

enharmonix (988983) | about 6 months ago | (#46249221)

LOL .. do you read Slashdot at all?

Because I would say most of us are suffering from "asshole syndrome" instead of "nice guy syndrome".

My original UID was in the 100,000s (I think, I seem to recall being disappointed it wasn't 5 digits). Anyway, the point is... I've read slashdot for a long time and most of the people here seem to fit the nerd stereotype pretty well and seems they still do, as long as you ignore the trolls and flamebait. The heated arguments here are always about data and empirical evidence and formal logic and the like. We don't really get passionate about everyday life, so I was basing my observations of nerds on people I know IRL. I really can't speak for your average /.er, on this subject because the subject just doesn't come up too often.

Re:Does the data imply better marriages? (1)

Nephandus (2953269) | about 6 months ago | (#46249115)

Geek chic is hipster bullshit. Tired of being poseurs without a genuine, they've taken to claiming geek and nerd without any real geekery or nerdity. Mostly they just wear hornrim glasses and other clothes geeks mostly don't to fit Hollywood stereotypes. They even bash and sneer at the real ones. The girls that aren't fashionably-pseudo-bi lesbians-or-asexuals are mostly Big Bang Theory and/or Harry Potter groupies who should be avoided at all costs, unless you want to be dictated to as a fashion accessory to a pretentious idiot, and I do mean that even worse than typical female partners.

Re:Does the data imply better marriages? (1)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about 6 months ago | (#46249701)

An interesting stat (to me) would be average age of: first marriage, first child born, etc. The broad population statistics hide things like this.

This doesn't mean they're not loners. (5, Insightful)

AlphaBro (2809233) | about 6 months ago | (#46248555)

In fact, this is yet another symptom. Their crushing loneliness compels them to wife the first woman that gives them a chance. I've seen this pattern repeatedly throughout the course of my career. It makes work related social events even more unbearable, having to endure exposure to so many unhappy marriages and whatnot.

Re:This doesn't mean they're not loners. (1)

enharmonix (988983) | about 6 months ago | (#46248737)

Their crushing loneliness compels them to wife the first woman that gives them a chance.

Loneliness in nerds is usually self-inflicted because we choose to socialize remotely (Iike slashdot). I think the typical nerd doesn't "wife the first woman that gives them the chance", but that, unlike your average Joe, they don't typically pursue relationships that they know wouldn't work out. In other words, it's not just somebody who'll give a geek a chance, but somebody who actually loves them enough not to turn around and divorce them after a year. Maybe that "never married" statistic contains the lonely geek stereotype, but I know a lot of geeks (IT, math and music) and most of them are happily married (and most of the ones who aren't are still in long-term, committed relationships). Mine is just anecdotal evidence, but the fact that census data shows both married and never married are above average makes me think nerds stay married.

Re:This doesn't mean they're not loners. (1)

Bigbutt (65939) | about 6 months ago | (#46249875)

Lifetime: 0+, 1, 0, 0+, 0, 1, 0, 0+.

I have to say I felt more alone when married than otherwise.

[John]

Re:Be a Knight or Queen (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248791)

Check Mate..., with their wife

Re:This doesn't mean they're not loners. (1)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about 6 months ago | (#46249751)

Look closely into the relationships of your M.D. and Lawyer friends (if you don't have any, just be nosy about strangers...)

They have plenty of relationship dysfunction too. Lots of doctors end up married (or committed to a life partner) young, and regret it later. Lawyers are all over the map, but I will say the ones that snag super-model type wives get what they deserve.

employment and salaries (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about 6 months ago | (#46248615)

Marriage rates have to do with employment and higher salaries much more than anything else in this case I bet, more even than with the education levels.

Re:employment and salaries (3, Insightful)

benjfowler (239527) | about 6 months ago | (#46248703)

I suspect that when women want to settle down and marry, they're after stability. Obviously, a man who has his act together enough to have an IT degree and a steady-paying job is stable, is likely to make a reliable husband/father, and is thus, worth marrying.

The transition point where women are happy to marry, is usually 20-ish for people without tertiary qualifications, 30-ish for people with bachelor degrees or better. What I've seen in the IT industry bears this out -- everyone under 30 is either single -- or if they have good social skills -- dating. EVERYONE over 30, without exception, is married. Even the complete, unwashed neckbeards.

In contrast, the people I've known, who were cocky winners in high-school, but otherwise dumb as dogsh*t, and stuck on low-paying jobs or the dole? Single, or bouncing between unstable, shitty relationships with fat ugly single mothers.

Stability is catnip for women looking to marry.

Re:employment and salaries (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248811)

Marriage is nothing more than a worthless title. All it does is bring few tax and legal benefits; nothing more. People do not need to marry, and yet many irrationally think it's this divine thing, even though they don't really pay attention to the benefits I just listed.

Furthermore, the people of which you speak are shallow. Never be in a relationship with someone shallow enough to care overmuch about someone's financial stability.

Re:employment and salaries (2)

benjfowler (239527) | about 6 months ago | (#46249669)

As far as 'marriage as title' goes, I think it's a bit more than that.

The sneering 'social justice' hipsters hate it, because they know that marriage entrenches "privilege" in the white middle class. 'Marriage', done properly, is designed to preserve and grow cultural, social and economic wealth in the white middle classes.

You're right -- it's just a "label". It's a powerful one, though.

Re:employment and salaries (1)

gIobaljustin (3526197) | about 6 months ago | (#46250229)

What are "social justice hipsters"? Well, regardless, it isn't "powerful" in any objective way and has nothing to do with being white or middle class. It doesn't really grow any of the things you mentioned, either; people with certain mentalities do that, and that has nothing to do with titles.

Re:employment and salaries (1)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about 6 months ago | (#46249821)

Marriage brings a tax penalty. Lots of old people shack up because they can't (/won't) afford the tax consequences of legal marriage - and they have plenty of free time on their hands to figure it all out.

There are some legal benefits (insurance coverage, etc.), but mostly it's a losing proposition.

And about the shallow enough to care about financial stability, you are absolutely right, in an ideal life, I would find my life partner - date for a few years, then fall on hard financial times and see what happens. Unfortunately, life rarely cooperates with presenting the right tests at the right time.

Re:employment and salaries (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248825)

Meh, GF and myself are in out mid 30's (35 for me, 33 for her) and in no hurry what-so-ever to marry. Been together for 7 years.

Marriage is overrated.

Re:employment and salaries (1)

PRMan (959735) | about 6 months ago | (#46249191)

Tell that to my 50s-some-odd cousin who is a musician and dated 2 girls for over 7 years each and never thought he needed to marry. Both relationships ended and he ruined his voice so that he can barely talk. Now he's been alone for over a decade. If he were married (especially to the first girl he dated), they would most likely still be together today, because he really is a pretty good guy and a great conversationalist (voice problems notwithstanding).

Re:employment and salaries (2)

gIobaljustin (3526197) | about 6 months ago | (#46249347)

And you attribute this to him not marrying? For what reason?

Marriage isn't a magical, divine thing; it's nothing more than a title. It won't fix bad relationships, and it won't magically make people stay together.

Re: employment and salaries (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249599)

EVERYONE over 30, without exception, is married.

*raises exception*

Re: employment and salaries (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249845)

catch (exception)

{

loser!

}

Re:employment and salaries (2)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about 6 months ago | (#46249777)

My uncle has 3 dogs and a tiny patch of grass outside his house. He told a joke once: Why are women like dog turds? They're both easier to pick up when they get older.

Re:employment and salaries (1)

fascismforthepeople (2805977) | about 6 months ago | (#46250427)

Where's the rest of your comment? You usually follow up every comment you post here with scripture from your religious leader. How will I know which part of your statement to love - and which part to hate - if you don't link to a youtube scripture reading?

Computer geeks != tech workers (2)

Sigma 7 (266129) | about 6 months ago | (#46248647)

A "computer geek" is a person who specializes in comptuers.

A tech worker is someone who works in the computer field.

Despite them being similar, they aren't the same. For example, call center tech support is filled with tech workers, but given the scripts and stuff they have, they don't have to specialize in the field.

The computer geek accepts computers as a hobby. This is different than a tech worker, as they end up with a general lack of scripts and go directly into the free-form world.

For this data analysis IT job categories were: IT managers, computer scientists, a broad range of IT analysts, as well as programmers, developers, support specialists, network and database administrators.

And this is basically stuffing a wide variety of carrers into one "tech worker" category. Programmers may be in a less social environment (although this varies), tech support specialists may be in a social environment while feeling socially isolated, etc.

Re:Computer geeks != tech workers (1)

minstrelmike (1602771) | about 6 months ago | (#46248733)

Accept tech worker, sheesh. It's not like all those engineers are actually driving locomotives or building circuit boards or drilling for oil or whatever it is all 'engineers' do.

imo, if you're in tech, then the tech should be working, not you ;-)

Re:Computer geeks != tech workers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249227)

Get over yourself. Some of the "tech workers*" I've ever known could kick the average "computer geeks*" ass and have no interest in computers outside of their day job. Geeks just don't have any other skills so they need to paste pictures of their latest overpriced wireless router to their Facebook to try to act like they're all 1337.
 
The truth is that most "computer geeks*" know next to nothing about real computing.
 
* Using your definitions, not mine. To me your "computer geeks" are just punks looking to get owned by someone who understands real computing.

Re:Computer geeks != tech workers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46250075)

Then there's the "smartest man in the room syndrome", which you so classically showed in your post. Congratulations!

Re:Computer geeks != tech workers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46250141)

Just because you couldn't make it in the NFL, NBA or Gymnastics, and now spend your hours delivering keyboards and mice to your co-workers, doesn't make you qualified to talk down to systems engineers.

Yeah, you might be able to *beat up* a systems engineer, but you couldn't think your way out of a wet paper bag.

And yes, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, systems engineers are all engineers, even if we don't get to wear the funny hats and pull the whistle cord on Thomas the Choo-Choo-Train.

"Data" is Plural (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248687)

"Data say," not "Data says." Unless, of course, you are writing TNG fanfic.

Re:"Data" is Plural (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 6 months ago | (#46249387)

Good catch. The singular is actually "datum". Same thing with "medium", "media".

Re:"Data" is Plural (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249643)

Modern usage includes definitions of data that are "uncountable" and therefore take the singular verb. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the phrasing of the article title. Please stop being such a pedant.

For example:

3) A body of facts; information: Additional data is available from the president of the firm.

Re:"Data" is Plural (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46250339)

Stupid nerd

This is /. the nerds here will choose whichever definition they want, from whichever time period they want to claim the other person is wrong in their usage.

online dating (0)

proxie (3418611) | about 6 months ago | (#46248697)

what % of those marriages resulted from online dating? probably very high.

Geek and Nerd (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248715)

Everyone claims to be a geek or nerd nowadays. Just like everyone thinks they are the smartest one in the room.

Normal distribution fail.

many computer geeks are not "tech workers" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46248727)

and many "tech workers" are not computer geeks.

I would agree that most tech workers are not loners, however I think an awful lot of loners are computer geeks. As a loner, I find computers to be a nice a hobby for someone that does not spend much time with other people.

LOL ... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 6 months ago | (#46248827)

Tech workers do have a slightly higher percentage of people who have never married -- 26.7% of IT workers and 31.9% of scientists -- but they also have slightly fewer divorces.

LOL, yeah, that about sums it up.

Introvert != Loner (1)

marcgvky (949079) | about 6 months ago | (#46248885)

I'm an ambivert. Many of my tech friends are generally introverts and do appreciate having their own space. But I would only categorize a minority of my computer geek buddies as loners.

Marriage Rates by Income (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249007)

This articles looks at marriage rates by income levels. Given that technology professions typically pay above averages wages, perhaps it's not surprising that geeks have marriage rates that are similar to other white collar professionals.

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/jobs/posts/2012/02/03-jobs-greenstone-looney [brookings.edu]

People with steady, good-paying jobs get married? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249181)

Huh! How about that! Who knew?!

Now for the real numbers... (1)

CanEHdian (1098955) | about 6 months ago | (#46249271)

First take in this story [slashdot.org] .

Perhaps "a 100-person Mechanical Turk study with a $5 research budget" should be done here as well, then define "married" to be engaged in holy matrimony with an actual physical human being (of the opposite, same, or any of the genders defined by Facebook). Perhaps the questionnaire failed to mention "IRL" so they thought WoW counted, too.

Well, Duh! (1)

McLae (606725) | about 6 months ago | (#46249475)

How can we be lonely? We have SlashDot!

Controlling for Age (1)

kumanopuusan (698669) | about 6 months ago | (#46249651)

In 2009, the median age at first marriage was 26 for women and 28 for men. Any job which requires significant education will have a higher average age than the general population, which probably explains the difference in marriage rates. This looks to be a simple average over job categories, which didn't account for that.

i'm a computer geek (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249707)

and i'm an extreme loner. zero surprise there.

Married, but still a loner... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46249997)

Look, just because you are married, doesn't mean you aren't still a loner.

Spouse may be outgoing, likes to get out, shop, visit friends, travel, etc...

Loner likes to stay home, take staycations (vacations at home), do as much as possible without leaving the domicile, and typically only interacts with other co-workers in small numbers.

Does this "scientific inquiry" take these factors into account?

Probably not.

it the researchers had done their job properly (1)

ozduo (2043408) | about 6 months ago | (#46250093)

they would have discovered that 27% of these married techies were actually counting their mother as a wife and 18.45% of those surveyed were counting their inflatable woman as a wife See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt08... [imdb.com]

Definition of "computer geek" has changed. (3, Interesting)

ErichTheRed (39327) | about 6 months ago | (#46250303)

I think the study might have some merit, but only because the definition of geek has changed a lot.

I got into computers in the early 80s as a very young kid. By the time I really got involved with a "geek" social scene, there was a mix of people. Before that, computers were most definitely nerd toys -- there were very few "typical" folks who gravitated toward them. Even so, I've worked with people who want nothing to do with computers once they are off the clock, people who have a healthy level of hobby involvement with computers, hardcore gamers, and extremely hardcore "computer nerds" -- mom's basement types. The first group are the most likely to be in a stable relationship from my experience. I'm happily married with 2 kiddos, and I put myself in the "healthy level of hobby involvement" camp. It's surprisingly hard to find time to do anything these days with 2 young kids. You certainly won't see me playing video games for 10 hours at a clip anymore...I used to do that back in the day though.

I do have anecdotal evidence from my dealings with "tech workers" that divorces are very common. Lots of people I work with are on Wife #2 or more. I think a lot of that might be the crazy amount of time that work and computer hobbies can suck out of your life -- you really have to be matched up with someone who will either tolerate it or is a "geek" themselves and understands. And like I said, once kids come along, I can see huge problems if you decide to disappear for hours on end and expect your partner to just handle the kids. If you work an IT job for one of the crappier employers out there that demands on-call duty and tons of hours a week, only the shallowest of spouses will stick around and only if you make good money to make up for you not being there.

My other piece of strictly anecdotal evidence is the prevalence of...non-traditional...relationships among the geekier set. One US-born guy I worked with was divorced and constantly trying to bring his girlfriend from China to the US -- no clue how they met. Lots have girlfriends they met online. Others have had obvious mail-order brides. That could sound a little stereotypical, but I've seen LOTS of guy's wives who barely speak English and look like they're pretty much there to cook and clean for them. Maybe I'm just working with the wrong sorts, but that's a very common theme in my experience.

Non-traditionals aside, I think a lot of the evidence the study cites is just because computers are now a normal part of our lives. Anyone can be a Facebook user. Smartphones are designed to be used by non-techies. There are plenty of "IT" jobs that don't involve hardcore coding or systems/analysis work. My job borders on the nerdy side, but only because I make it that way.

I think that if you actually do find the right person, and that person is less of a geek than you are, it balances you out. My wife is incredibly smart, but not obsessed with computers and tinkering the way I am. (She's a finance geek.) If you find someone who's just there for the money or has absolutely no interest in what you do, that's where the divorces and bitterness creep in. I'm almost at 15 years married -- and she hasn't tossed me out yet!

Nerd games (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46250311)

Dungeons & Dragons(TM) nerdiest game ever, requires friends.

Who says loners don't get married? (2)

unimacs (597299) | about 6 months ago | (#46250335)

Went on a ski trip with about 10 people recently. One was a self-described loner who was married. You have to qualify the term "loner" to a certain extent. He was quite sociable and seemed to enjoy the trip, but it was a special event and not a group he hung out with on a regular basis.

Anyway in the IT group here, everyone that I know of is either in a relationship or married. Included in this group is one of the most unsocial people I've ever met, - at least when it comes to work. But there are folks at the other end of the spectrum too. I picked the word "unsocial" because it isn't like he's rude or actively avoids people. He just doesn't participate in the common sorts of workplace social activities. No lunches. No going out for coffee. No happy hours. Even if it's an official company party, either at the office or someplace else, he won't be there.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>